"Notice how he dodges the journalist's questions".

Morrison dodges questions on everything. He is the most secretive PM we have ever had. His happy clapping in the midst of a sweaty mob doesn't make him a Christian either.

Anyone trying to analyse the man is doomed to failure: there is nothing there to latch onto. Morrison is a void.

No!

He like the Author is still welded to the Christian/ (Constantine) manifesto. And like the Author? Is able to cherry-pick from Contatine's cherry-picked Dogma for convenience?

In the days when alleged Biblical text was written, some 350 years after the event? Many books were left out at the behest of Constantine and or, his hand-picked minions!

One needs to understand that it was once required of believers to believe that planet earth was just 6,000 years old, at the centre of the universe which revolved around it! And those who challenged such irrefutable sacred text could be excommunicated!

And only possible because like all manifestos of cults, it had to be brainwashed into the herded and control community who had in this system of POLITICAL CONTROL they had no more rights to heir own minds than common herded cattle!

If J.C. Walked among us today with his predilection for exclusive male company and kind gentle nature he'd probably be labelled by the Auther as a homosexual deviant!?

And given he is now walking among us? Would probably have voted for SSM, given we are created as we are, flawed, warts and all! Ever human extant on the planet has the right to love and be loved, express themselves sexually as it is natural to them even if it seems, like left-handedness an aberration of the perceived norm.

It is written therefore it is true is all the proof any alleged believer (cult member) needs to persecute and discriminate against any personally perceived difference.

So, On these pages, I will write.

You Sir a hidebound fool spreading hate and deception?

And to use your own standard of irrefutable proof.

Because it is written! It is therefore true!
Alan B.

Whatever he may be it will be most interesting should one of his "miracle" daughters turn out to be gay.

The principle of "Separation of Church & State" means Christians must run for office & win an election. Rather than be appointed to the King's court for no reason other than being Bishop.

NOTHING else. We are a Christian country. Christianity was written into both our Constitution & Common Law.

Christian principles should be foremost with EVERY politician, public servant & government.

If Christians were united on many of these issues then I agree that the standard should be shared by politicians claiming their faith to be Christian. Unfortunately, I've come across too many types of christians to hold a standard of what counts as Christian and what doesn't. Some don't believe in the bible, because of social preasure to call it outdated and an old book. Others don't believe in miracles, the very works that God does that are above and beyond the natural element of the world. And many without a tradition, a church foundation, or a devote study to ground them, mix up popular ideas with their faith. Things like "God looks after those who look after themselves" instead of that "God looks after the poor, the sick, and the widowed."

With such confusion in the ranks one question needs to be asked, what makes a person a Christian? Is it a base knowledge and understanding that is agreed with? Go past that line and reject some of that and you are no longer a Christian? Is it obedience to teachings and the laws? Is it faith in God and Jesus? I'm sure whatever answer to the question "what makes a Christian a Christian," will overlap the three aspects above with faith, understanding, and obedience (behavior), all summing up a minimum for what it means to be a Christian.

(Continued)

(Continued)

I think it is good for Christians to hold each other accountable in order to strengthen them in their faith. But I also know that kindness and understanding should be there too. Very few Christians can say they are great at understanding God's direction, great at acting according to their faith, and great at having faith that is stronger then the difficulties and the opposition we face in life.

The trouble with ScoMo is probably the same trouble many Christians face. They believe but are not strong in their beliefs. They have faith but are not always confidant in that faith. Or they compromise their behaviors and do not follow the direction they know is right.

I know these are just a bunch of excuses for anyone regardless if they are a PM, or are anyone else, but excuses or not this is the situation we find ourselves in. Our weaknesses are easy to over power most of us.

OzSpen, from what you've shown in this article it seems ScoMo is along the same lines. He dodges some of those questions because he's not strong in his Christian foundation to stand up to the opposition. A quality that unfortunately many of us share. If you can, pray for him. Even in light of his stumbling. If you can do more then that too, awesome. Encourage him when you can, and confront him when he's in the wrong. But still pray for him even if you can do more also.

Why the obsessive attention to a belief system?

Does Christianity relate to facts and truths, or is it just a fantasy of faith?

We have need in our society for governments to manage and oversee policy on our behalf, not to indulge in rhetorical persuasion.

This essay gives a unique Understanding of what the Process that is True Religion is (and should be) about:
http://www.da-peace.org/excerpt-all-modes-of-true-religion

Needless to say much/most of what is now promoted as religion does not come anywhere near this. Such is of course the case with those at the more "fundamentalist" spectrum of religion. The kind of self-righteous religionists that enthusiastically support Donald Trump for instance.

Meanwhile most of the usual self-righteous religionists are just narcissus in "religious" drag, as described in this essay:
http://www.dabase.org/up-1-6.htm

On narcissus http://www.beezone.com/narcissus.html

you raise some good points Spencer. Any thinking person needs to lie about the evolution myth to get a piece of paper from universities who are the hotbed of Marxism. Now people are expected to be irrational to get a science degree by nodding their head to the fraudulent global warming rubbish.

I do think you are a little unfair of expecting the PM to bang on about things the people recently voted on ('gay') marriage. I agree entirely with your theological view on this however being in charge of Rome is certainly different from being a church leader who oversee the flock. Obviously the promotion of perversion is never good for a nation.

The abortion issue, which is plainly murder of innocent babies hidden by skin is one that has largely been promoted and endorsed by State Governments. No person with any compassion could condone such barbarity. Planned parenthood actually make Hitler look somewhat reasonable.

Love never ever demands obedience or blind unquestioned faith! But only asks you follow example. Never ever demands you ignore your God-given, natural instincts!

And practised what it preaches, walks the walk! Not talk the talk and decide without Authority, how others should conduct and lead their lives!

Being a true Christian as outlined in the alleged teachings of the Rabbi, Jesus and being a non-progressive conservative politician are without question, mutually exclusive ideals!

And there are countless examples in the teaching and example of Jesus where this is made abundantly clear.

The Rabbi was a very plain no-nonsense no BS (verily, verily) speaker who went to some lengths in his parables to ensure those who came later, [Constantine and his minions etc,] couldn't reinterpret everything he said to confer an entirely different meaning from his original doctrine!

Early esoteric Christians did not build great edifices to glorify God but met in one and another's homes to break bread in remembrance. And went as far as they could to spread a doctrine of non-judgemental Christian kindness.

And where what we see now so different in every element to be unrecognisable from the early esoteric (inasmuch as you do unto the least among you, you also do unto me) example! None on display in any of today's parliaments!
Alan B.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

Since I am not a Christian, it is not my place to try and answer your question: "what makes a person a Christian?".

That said, I wonder what is the motive behind that question of yours: a question like this would only make sense to the extent that there are practical repercussions for being or not-being a Christian (for example, if only Christians received a free meal, a Christmas gift, a badge to wear on parades, an exemption from being burned at the stake, the ability to marry into royalty or the opportunity for communion).

Otherwise, who are we to judge the spirituality of others?

Hindus do not ask "What makes a person a Hindu?": that would be silly because the fruits of observance, devotion and worship are private and spiritual. Still, at the entrance to some temples, the priest or the guards may rightly want to know whether a visitor wants to come to worship or to take photos, that is because non-worshipping tourists might detract from the concentration of the worshippers, it is a practical matter.

Christian or otherwise, we agree that Christianity can provide a true spiritual merit, with or without any attached perks - then why deny this spiritual merit from anyone, even if they only want to taste?

"Come, all you who are thirsty, come to the waters;
and you who have no money, come, buy and eat!
Come, buy wine and milk without money and without cost.
Why spend money on what is not bread,
and your labor on what does not satisfy?
Listen, listen to me, and eat what is good,
and you will delight in the richest of fare."
[Isaiah 55:1-2]

Not_Now.Soon,

<<... from what you've shown in this article it seems ScoMo is along the same lines. He dodges some of those questions because he's not strong in his Christian foundation to stand up to the opposition. A quality that unfortunately many of us share. If you can, pray for him. Even in light of his stumbling. >>

You've made a perceptive assessment. ScoMo, as our Aussie Christian Prime Minister, faces challenges similar to those of us in any workforce. Will we look at work and the rest of life through the lens of Scripture and make the necessary adjustments? Or, will we compromise our standards for the sake of popularity. It must be so much harder for a prominent Christian in the public arena.

I pray for ScoMo to keep strong under the pressure but I also call on him to be more overt in what he believes. Perhaps he's not sure how he can be a public face for Christianity and not offend many in our multicultural society. It seems to me he needs a couple introductory courses in Christian apologetics.

Wouldn't it be good to hear that he listens to podcasts by John Dickson, William Lane Craig, Lee Strobel and Ravi Zacharias.

Ponder,

<<Why the obsessive attention to a belief system? Does Christianity relate to facts and truths, or is it just a fantasy of faith?>>

Out of your and my beliefs will flow actions. Christianity is based on facts & truths. The Apostle Paul made that clear:

'If Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your faith is useless. And we apostles would all be lying about God—for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave. But that can’t be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. And if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless and you are still guilty of your sins' (1 Corinthians 15:14-16).

Without the fact of Jesus Christ's resurrection, preaching for Christ is useless, as is Christian faith.

That's why it's important to understand the faith of anyone, whether atheist, pantheist or theist. All such world views impact on what we do in life.

Lets talk about 'Christian peer pressure'.

From the time you're in the baby seat you're off to church.

Do you believe in God they ask?

If you say "No" or "I don't know" they say "Don't you want to go to heaven?" and "You don't want to go to hell do you?"
[Soliciting a response]

So you say "Yes" just to shut them up, but that doesn't help things;
Because once you say that, they start carving out all the intricate beliefs for you.

"Well if you're a real Christian then you must believe in this and that and this and this, and this - otherwise you're going to hell."

"You can't listen to that, It's devil music, you'll go to hell"
"You can't look at that female, you're a sodomite and you're going to hell"
"You can't wear that it's immodest, you'll go to hell"
"You can't be associating with those people, you'll go to hell"

Or they'll manipulate you with scripture,

"Obviously if you believe in God and Jesus that you must believe everything in the bible is correct as it's the word of God".

"You must believe that God parted the sea and Jesus fed an thousands with a single loaf of bread;
If not, you lack faith and are going to hell"

It's just one big psy-op of manipulation and control, from cradle to the grave.

Armchair Critic,

<<It's just one big psy-op of manipulation and control, from cradle to the grave.>>

Your last post presented a Strawman Fallacy of misrepresentation of Christianity, http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/169/Strawman-Fallacy. You gave a plethora of your points of antagonism to Christianity. You changed biblical Christianity to your misrepresented version of the argument of my article.

Why do you refuse to deal with the content of my article? Your reply here is fallacious reasoning. We can't have a rational discussion when you do this.

Now let's get back to a point I made in the article: Religion and politics don't mix. Is this a true or false statement? Please give reasons for either view.

OzSpen states that:

"Without the fact of Jesus Christ's resurrection, preaching for Christ is useless, as is Christian faith.

That's why it's important to understand the faith of anyone, whether atheist, pantheist or theist. All such world views impact on what we do in life."

That claim supports the reasoning that faith is the essence of religions.
If you cannot believe in the concept of resurrection, then as OzSpen suggests, 'preaching for Christ is useless'.

Why allow critical outcomes to depend on faith, instead of fact?

Ponder,

<<That claim supports the reasoning that faith is the essence of religions.
If you cannot believe in the concept of resurrection, then as OzSpen suggests, 'preaching for Christ is useless'.>>

I said nothing whatsoever about ''the concept of resurrection". That's your invention. The issue of historical, bodily resurrection in Christianity is one in which:

+ The resurrection accounts in the New Testament (NT) list 12 different appearances of Christ after his resurrection.

+ They were not hallucinations because they happened in various situations to a number of different people. There is no such thing as a 'group hallucination'.

+ They were physical and tangible evidence because Jesus' actions included eating and speaking with the disciples, touching his side and hands.

Yes, he was immortal (or trans-physical) but he existed bodily on earth until his Ascension.

However, these appearances were physical and tangible in nature, as evidenced by Christ's actions (e.g., eating with the disciples and suggesting that they touch his side and his hands). His resurrected body, though immortal, was undoubtedly a physical body.

<<Why allow critical outcomes to depend on faith, instead of fact?>>

My faith is founded on fact, not on what you consider faith is.

Emeritus professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, Dr Paul L. Maier, concludes:

‘If all the evidence is weighed carefully and fairly, it is indeed justifiable, according to the canons of historical research, to conclude that the tomb in which Jesus was buried was actually empty on the morning of the first Easter. And no shred of evidence has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy, or archaeology that would disprove this statement.’

Dr John Warwick Montgomery, theologian and Christian apologist, comments: ‘It passes the bounds of credibility that the early Christians could have manufactured such a tale and then preached it among those who might easily have refuted it simply by producing the body of Jesus’.

how anyone who believes in something from nothing, order from chaos, laws from no Law Maker can critise faith is hypocrisy, dumb and irrational. No wonder so many gullible have adopted the gw religion in order to want to look morally superior to others. The world view of god deniers simply lead to the murder of the unborn babies hidden by skin, gross immorality, self righteousness and arrogance. To think that Jesus Christ still chose to die for man in his arrogance is astounding. To reject that kind of love and forgiveness is literally unforgiveable.

To Ponder. You asked:

"Why the obsessive attention to a belief system?"

The answer? Because it matters. Let's go over a few different belief systems. In Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Baha'i, a very strong belief is that there is a God. Who created the universe, and who the world is accountable to. If that is true then that matters a great deal. In Hinduism there is the the belief that people have multiple lives and that their actions will have some karmic consequences in either this life or the next one. If that is true that matters a great deal. If it makes it easier look at a non-religious belief. Global warming narratives repeatedly say we have 10-15 years left of good years on the earth before it goes to hell, and so we should make every effort to right our wrongs to the environment while we still can. If that is true then that matters a great deal.

If any of those beliefs are true then that should affect the actions of those who believe them. They matter enough to change your actions and your behavior. Even if they are not true, those who believe them should have their actions match their convictions. Because those convections hold a lot of consequences to them.

The point is that the attention to a belief system should affect everything else in a person's life, including governing Australia. If it doesn't affect what a person does, then likely they don't actually believe it to be true in the first place. That's the power of a belief.

(Continued)

(Continued)

Actually Ponder, I'm sure you understand this already. After all, in your reply to OzSpen, you also said: "Why allow critical outcomes to depend on faith, instead of fact?" Which is a sign of how to assign beliefs, instead of recognizing their effect. My answer to that is that beliefs should be able to be both scrutinized to see if they are correct or not, as well as respected (as long as they aren't a threat to others) so people have the freedom to think on their own. The facts as they are don't discredit Christianity. But then again, "Why the obsessive attention to a belief system?"

To Alan B.

You said that love never asks for obedience or blind unquestionable faith. I can think of two instances where it does though. Two of the strongest bonds of love that we see in relationships. A parent teaching their kids right from wrong and obeying the rules of the house. They don't have to say why it's wrong to hit, or why they should share, but in loving their children they expect them to obey them and learn these lessons. In marriage as well, a couple expects loyalty from their spouse. This means faithfulness. Don't cheat on your spouse, and if you know something bothers them, try not to do it out of love for them. I know this takes the romance out of the equation, but the truth is that love has an element of being faithful, obedient, and loyal in the nature of love. If it doesn't have those elements in it, you can question if it's love there or not.

To Yuyutsu.

This might be hard to swallow, but hear me out. Jesus warned us about those who are false Christians, as well as gave warnings to so called false Christians. But my point in the matter wasn't about finding out who is a real Christian (and rewording them or something) and who isn't (and ousting them). My point is that unfortunately what would count as a minimum requirement of being a Christian seems to be a hard line to draw, and thus is hard to hold standards for. For the MP, but or for anyone else.

To Armchair Critic.

Was that your experience with Christianity? If so then I'm sorry for you. I don't think that's accurate of Christianity though. It's been my experience that there are many philosophies within Christian culture that are not actually anything Christian at all. Finding out the difference has been one of the first things I've tried to accomplish when I accepted Christianity.

To OzSpen.

I'm glad you understand my stance on the matter. Keep on praying for him.

Hey Spencer,

"Your last post presented a Strawman Fallacy..."

Pfffttt.
Why don't you try explaining that in your own words?
Do you baffle the fragile minds at church with that bs?

"Why do you refuse to deal with the content of my article?"

I did, I just didn't deal with it in the way you wanted me to.

- And you'd think that someone who specialises in parables would learn to see the bigger picture but no...

You keep thinking that you have some control over what I say;
That you pose the questions and then correct everyone's answers.
I might have to start calling you Dorothy (Dixer) if you keep it up.

I'm not a trained monkey.
I wont jump through any hoops for anyone unless I choose to.
Stop asking the questions and then trying to steer everyone towards your own answers and outcome.

[Cont.]
What my comment had to do with your article is that your trying to use the same peer pressuring ideology to force our PM into acting in accordance with religion.

It's not his job to act in accordance to his religion.
In his personal private life yes, sure.
As our PM its his job to act in the citizens best interests, as well as his own, if he wants to get re-elected.

"We can't have a rational discussion when you do this."

You seem to get everything wrong.
It's called online opinion, not online discussion.
You had your say in the article, this is where we have our say.

"Now let's get back to a point I made in the article"

Don't try to steer or control me.
Just ask me.

"Religion and politics don't mix. Is this a true or false statement?"

I'd rather not go with a 'true' or 'false' answer to be honest;
- but if you forced me to choose I'd probably say True, they don't mix;

And why? Because man can't serve two masters.
You either serve your God or you serve your Constituents.
- And I don't think one can successfully serve both -

But that said, I'm not sure politicians can serve both their party and their constituents at the same time very well either.

Dear Critic,

Government is there to serve itself and a political party, not its constituents (which is just an empty propaganda slogan).

Everyone (Christian or otherwise) should always [do one's best to] serve God in whatever circumstance they find themselves.

Now why are you saying that serving God is in conflict with serving His people? Are they enemies?

Different people have different callings from God. The author oversimplifies this reality to assume that one's calling must be equal to enforcing the doctrine of a Church - but this is only one possibility among infinitely many ways God can operate in.

I would like to see some wo/man of God (Christian or otherwise), inspired by the Holy-Spirit to infiltrate the ranks of government and dismantle it from within, somewhat like what Gorbachev did in breaking down the tyranny of the communist Soviet-Union. This requires patience and it makes sense that such a person would initially need to remain quiet and seem to conform. Who knows, perhaps our hero is already there, making his/her way up to the top?

Hey Yuyutsu,

"Different people have different callings from God."

And different people have different Gods Yuyutsu;
Some like yourself even switch religions and have different Gods at different times of their lives.

We live in a liberal secular country that includes some level of religious freedom.
How do you propose to please everyone?

If ScoMo was Muslim, would the Christians still think he was the best person above all else to lead them?
Maybe Spencer could give him pointers in regards to his adherence to the hadiths?

On the other side of things international democracy doesn't give a crap about religions and does not respect any of your religious beliefs.

I shared this a few months back;

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/2019/october/christian-doc-loses-job-as-uk-judge-rules-biblical-view-of-male-and-female-violates-human-dignity-nbsp

Now I'll share this:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-healthcare-religion-lawsuit/trump-backed-conscience-rule-for-healthcare-workers-voided-by-u-s-judge-idUSKBN1XG2DD?il=0

New World Order seeks to undermine all collective forces except their own.
Ordo Ab Chao

Armchair Critic,

<<t's not his job to act in accordance to his religion. In his personal private life yes, sure.>>

That's your philosophy. It didn't come from Scripture. Acts 5:29 refutes you: 'We must obey God rather than human beings' Then add, 'So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God' (1 Corinthians 10:31).

ScoMo as our Prime Minister and a Christian needs to do his politics 'all for the glory of God'. His job and mine are to obey God and not human beings. We see all of life through the lens of the Bible. That's why I don't support murder of unborn human beings in the womb or killing the elderly. Adultery destroys marriages.

You want to change that biblical mandate. I'm sticking with Scripture.

NNS,

<<OzSpen, from what you've shown in this article it seems ScoMo is along the same lines. He dodges some of those questions because he's not strong in his Christian foundation to stand up to the opposition.>>

From my observation of ScoMo's Christianity in public, I think his foundation needs bolstering. A couple courses under Ravi Zacharias would be a great starter. Then throw in a few seminars by William Lane Craig. I think Craig may be too heavy for him.

Could you imagine ScoMo going to Craig's seminar on The Kalam Cosmological Argument for God's existence? See: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-nature-of-god/the-kalam-cosmological-argument/

Dear Spencer,

«a Christian needs to do his politics 'all for the glory of God'. His job and mine are to obey God and not human beings.»

So true, but why only a Christian and why only politics? EVERYONE ought to do everything for the glory of God!

«We see all of life through the lens of the Bible.»

I do not, but it does not stop me from acknowledging and admiring these particular two verses that you quoted.

«ScoMo as our Prime Minister and a Christian needs to do his politics 'all for the glory of God'.»

Yes, but not necessarily overtly. While you might ridicule him for not being SEEN as a Christian working for the glory of God, his and God's tactics may be unknown to you!

---

Dear Critic,

One can switch religions, or one's route towards God, but no one can switch Gods, not just because there is only one, but because YOU too are that one!

«If ScoMo was Muslim, would the Christians still think he was the best person above all else to lead them?»

Well, why would you or anyone want someone to lead them in the first place? Are we blind sheep? Well, we can be blind at times, but why would I ask a politician to guide me? I rather ask my guru, or others who are ahead of me on the spiritual journey.

Now if a Muslim, likely a Sufi, was well advanced spiritually [and if there is still to be a government and a prime-minister], then others who seek and love God, including Christians, ought to be very happy to have him/her as their prime-minister.

I think you could benefit and enjoy reading the link that was provided by Duffy Duck earlier in this thread:
http://www.da-peace.org/excerpt-all-modes-of-true-religion

«international democracy doesn't give a crap about religions»

Nor does a toilet-paper roll: "international democracy" is a mental construct, an object rather than an intelligent subject. Objects cannot care for anything.

Hey Spencer,

You've really got to learn to watch where you're walking mate.
It's like I point out "Hey there's a really pile of crap over here!"
- And then you just deliberately run over and step in it -

I point out your general mentality and behaviour here:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=20592&page=0#362862

Then you chuck a Trigglypuff tanting out with your fallacy waffle.
{Please explain}

Then I point my reasoning out again here when you ask.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=20592&page=0#362875

But then in your VERY NEXT response you go and do exactly what I previously pointed out and that which you refuted;

- reinforcing the way in which the PM should act as per his religion -

Are you so stupid that you don't realise you're just proving my original statement correct?
That 'Christian peer pressure' is just one big psy-op of manipulation and control, from cradle to the grave?

Are you so caught up in your beliefs that you can't stand back for 5 seconds, look at the bigger picture and see how your own actions appear to others?

(And if you don't know why Trigglypuff is look her up)

If ScoMo was PM 50 years ago before so many were dumbed down by godless educators and deviants the majority of the population would of had enough compassion and sense to know killing the unborn babies is simply murder, homosexuality is not natural and that science to a large degree was not political (except the evolution fantasy). Our current generation even though many practice gross immorality are so self righteous they sit in judgment of previous generations. Its no wonder the likes of young Greta and many others think they are superior in morality.

Personally I think our PM is a toothless tiger who has good intentions but has to please to many to reverse the evil that has passed our State and Federal Parliaments. He is only one voice. He has a few good guys around him but still a number of deviants in the party.

On the other hand we see Trump with all his carnality and flaws doing more good for his country than any other leader I have seen in my lifetime. His critics have so much egg on their face that they have no choice but to dig in. He has exposed the lying left liberal media on numerous occasions and cut heaps of funding to the baby killing industry. He has stopped funding the gw fraudsters and had the courage to support the only democracy in the Middle East. Confusing? Yes! Refreshing! You bet.

Not_Now.Soon,

<<OzSpen, from what you've shown in this article it seems ScoMo is along the same lines. He dodges some of those questions because he's not strong in his Christian foundation to stand up to the opposition. A quality that unfortunately many of us share. If you can, pray for him.>>

Thank you for your faithful reminder. I don't find the foundations of his faith to be strong enough for an adequate public declaration of what he believes. He needs to do this with special knowledge of how to be sensitive to the beliefs of others in our multicultural society.

He needs to do it with gentleness and respect.

I must confess I have not prayed for him as often as I should have. Thank you for this timely reminder.

Spencer, your comments are thought provoking, as ever. One thing that disturbs me is the level of contempt directed towards Scott Morrison on social media, contempt largely because he is a professed Christian. All national leaders have targets on their backs. For Christians the target is twice the size and painted in fleuro .
I suspect that ScMo is trying to be "wise as a serpent" in his equivocal responses to questions about his faith, and instead is showing himself to be weak as a kitten. He will be vilified by some whatever he does and says. At least let the vilification come in the wake of boldly speaking God's Word, not in pussyfooting around in a vain attempt to avoid giving offence.
Christian friends, pray for our Prime Minister.

PenelopeP,

Thank you for your encouragement.

Sadly, often I see this contempt directed at ScoMo and Christians with the use of logical fallacies, as seen in this thread:

+ 'Then you chuck a Trigglypuff tanting out with your fallacy waffle. {Please explain}'

+ 'Are you so stupid that you don't realise you're just proving my original statement correct? That 'Christian peer pressure' is just one big psy-op of manipulation and control, from cradle to the grave?'

Since I don't read much of social media, I don't know the level of contempt against him. However, I see it in the 'Comments' sections in the mainline news media. See "'I'll burn for you': How our Pentecostal PM energised Christian voters" (The Sydney Morning Herald, May 21, 2019), http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/i-ll-burn-for-you-pentecostal-pm-energises-christian-voters-20190521-p51prq.html.

At the time of writing this, there were 482 comments with some provocative comments such as:

* "If the so-called 'Christian' vote is going to decide governments henceforth, then Australia is in big trouble because, historically (and notably excepting Kevin Rudd), these 'Christian' politicians also espouse the rejection of science, equality, truth and honesty".

* 'So how about explaining what attributes of Jesus's teaching are observable in Morrison?'

* 'Scomo has "faith"....no reason, rationality, no evidence and he's our PM'.